--- Comment #18 from Luis Villa (WMF Legal) <> ---
(In reply to Krinkle from comment #17)
> So if I understand correctly, the whitelist of properties you approved in
> comment 12 are in fact allowed for identifiable queries (e.g. with
> user_id/user name attached to it), as opposed to the anonymized view.

Yes, that is correct, for those categories. 

As far as implementation, we'll want to review new fields as they are added,
which is why I prefer a whitelist approach (review what is released; hard to
accidentally release data accidentally) to a blacklist approach (review what is
not released; easy to release data accidentally by not adding it to the

> And when you say "OK in principle" for the anonymized view, that means all
> properties?

Yes, based on my understanding that they are already available on toolserver in
user_properties_anonym and/or via the API. If they aren't already public (via
API or toolserver) we should probably review one-by-one, and/or do a more
careful scrutiny of the anonymization procedures. Maybe that deserves a
separate bug?

You are receiving this mail because:
You are on the CC list for the bug.
Wikibugs-l mailing list

Reply via email to